Commentary: The State of the Union and Immigration

If my husband reads this, he'll have a hundred policy questions for me, so I feel that I need to preface my thoughts by saying that I am not a policy-maker nor a politician, so I am not responding to the State of the Union as one who has a plan. I am rather responding to it as one who is dissatisfied with the government's perception of issues versus my own perceptions and experiences. I think that as a citizen, I am allowed to be dissatisfied without necessarily having an alternative policy formulated in response. I simply found some parts of the State of the Union to be troubling, and wanted to comment on my dissatisfaction.

President Bush's comments on immigration:

Extending hope and opportunity in our country requires an immigration system worthy of America -- with laws that are fair and borders that are secure. When laws and borders are routinely violated, this harms the interests of our country. To secure our border, we're doubling the size of the Border Patrol, and funding new infrastructure and technology.

Yet even with all these steps, we cannot fully secure the border unless we take pressure off the border -- and that requires a temporary worker program. We should establish a legal and orderly path for foreign workers to enter our country to work on a temporary basis. As a result, they won't have to try to sneak in, and that will leave Border Agents free to chase down drug smugglers and criminals and terrorists. We'll enforce our immigration laws at the work site and give employers the tools to verify the legal status of their workers, so there's no excuse left for violating the law.

We need to uphold the great tradition of the melting pot that welcomes and assimilates new arrivals. We need to resolve the status of the illegal immigrants who are already in our country without animosity and without amnesty. Convictions run deep in this Capitol when it comes to immigration. Let us have a serious, civil, and conclusive debate, so that you can pass, and I can sign, comprehensive immigration reform into law.

This is President Bush's statement on immigration made during last night's State of the Union Address. I honestly have to say that I am disappointed with him, with his researchers, and with his speechwriters. First of all, I am amazed that he believes that building a bigger wall will "solve" illegal immigration, as if the only way that immigrants reside in this country illegally is by jumping the fence from Mexico. I would agree that the country needs laws that are fair and borders that are secure, but I'm not so sure that President Bush and I agree as to who these secure borders should be keeping out. His second paragraph, when he speaks of freeing up time and resources to pursue drug smugglers, criminals, and terrorists, hints that these are the reasons for further securing and guarding our border (keeping in mind, again, that he's really only speaking to our southern border, and not really speaking about our border with Canada, or either of our shores). And yet I am concerned that in presenting the necessity for border security driven by a cultivation of fear, he forgets to make the stronger point that immigration and terrorism/criminal activity are not one and the same. Or even that illegal immigration and terrorism/criminal activity are not one in the same.

This is not the only place in the whole of the State of the Union that I felt that Bush was trying too hard to rely on his high approval rating post-September 11, 2001. Without wanting to imply that there is no terror risk whatsoever, I still feel that Bush is relying too heavily on a fear of terror that is going on 6 years in the past. Specifically concerning border security and immigration (which are, indeed, related and yet separate issues), I think that it is unfair to mush together "keeping out the terrorists" (with its distinctly 9/11 undertones) and "comprehensive immigration reform."

I, of course, am speaking out of a heartfelt opinion that our immigration policies and laws are fundamentally flawed and need some serious overhauling. I am unwilling to criminalize all immigrants who enter or reside in the country illegally, and I am unwilling to accept building a bigger wall as either a solution to illegal/undocumented immigration or as a sufficient plan of "immigration reform."

I am willing to hear more about a guest worker program - though it would be nicer if there were a way to earn residency or citizenship through it - but I am unwilling to go along with the misconception that work is the only reason that immigrants (documented or undocumented) enter this country. The number one reason that immigrants come to this country is to join a family member who is already here. Immigrants are looking for political amnesty from countries that are in turmoil, or for opportunities for their children. Simply adding a guest worker program is not a quick-fix for illegal immigration. It is one step along the road toward immigration reform and away from criminalizing immigrants. I think that his paragraph concerning this was overly simplistic, and misinformed as to the real issues surrounding illegal immigration.

And as to finding a way to resolve the status of illegal immigrants already in the country with neither amnesty or animosity? At what point do you just need to offer amnesty in order to wipe the slate clean in order to really enact reform? There are 11 million illegal immigrants in the country right now. Are we to use up time, resources, and money to find them all and deport them? Or are we to find ways to encourage their voluntary return to their home countries? Or are we to find alternative ways to legalize their status, either through work or military service? These are all options, not that I agree with all of them. Or it is simply time to decide that a population of 11 million is large enough that we need to offer one-time amnesty so that we can focus our time, money, and resources on fixing our flawed immigration system instead of picking up after it?